The analgesic and antipyretic paracetamol (acetaminophen) is generally considered safe in therapeutic doses. The most important toxic effect is hepatotoxicity after supratherapeutic doses or in the presence of risk factors (eg, malnutrition, alcoholism). According to the WHO analgesic ladder, a combination of a non-opioid analgesic such as paracetamol with a strong opioid is recommended as step III treatment of patients with chronic pain, despite limited evidence for this approach. The main aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that paracetamol does not provide clinically relevant benefits when added to strong opioids in patients with chronic pain.

Investigator-initiated, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial at two Swiss hospitals. A total of 140 patients with chronic pain requiring strong opioids and paracetamol ≥1.5 g/day for at least 7 days will be enrolled and randomised to either continued combination treatment or strong opioid plus placebo. In the first study phase (days 1–7), patients receive identically looking capsules containing either paracetamol at the exact dose previously used or a placebo. During a second study phase (days 7–14), all patients stop the blinded study medication (paracetamol and placebo) with follow-up to day 14. Adherence will be assessed by pill count and measurement of paracetamol and opioid serum concentrations. Patients are instructed to use a pain diary daily during the whole study. The primary outcome is the average pain score on day 7 using a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS). A difference between groups of ≤8 mm will be considered clinically irrelevant. Secondary outcomes will include VAS pain score on day 14, number of opioid rescue doses used, subjective ratings of overall feeling of well-being, quality of life, nausea/vomiting, drowsiness and constipation, and other adverse events, and potential effects of study drug concentrations and opioid receptor and cytochrome P450 (CYP) genotypes on the observed differences.

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee (Ethikkommission Bern, reference number 2021-01518) and the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic, reference number 701286). Results will be published in open-access policy peer-reviewed journals. The study is funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 32 003B_201072).

NCT05088876.

Prehospital notification by emergency medical services (EMS) can activate hospital resources before the patient arrives, which has been shown to improve in-hospital care for stroke patients. Optimising prehospital and handover processes in stroke care requires considering end-user perspectives to enhance acceptance and effectiveness of the developed solutions. The aim of this study was to identify current barriers in the preclinical-clinical phase of stroke care.

Within the investigator-initiated CAEHR project (CArdiovascular diseases—Enhancing Healthcare through cross-sectoral Routine data integration), an interface for transferring data from the electronic prenotification system to the hospital information system is implemented. A mixed-methods approach with semi-structured interviews as well as a cross-sectional online survey was used to gather feedback from healthcare professionals at a single stroke centre in Germany as well as from the participating EMS personnel. Data collection for the interviews was conducted between January and August 2023 and for the online survey between May and September 2023.

Interviews were conducted with 10 healthcare professionals, including seven from the neurological clinic and three from EMS. Additionally, 39 EMS employees took part in a cross-sectional online survey.

Challenges identified were educational and training aspects affecting preclinical processes and patient handover procedures, along with the opportunity for establishing more uniform protocols. Participants emphasised the importance of detailed patient information. Electronic prenotification was seen as an important step regarding structured information transmission, reducing the risk of information loss in stroke care.

The study highlights the importance of addressing organisational processes in addition to technical interfaces for implementing effective stroke care processes.

German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00029103.